The trouble with Ban Ki-moon

In the little compound known as “Bantanamo,” located outside the UN headquarters in New York, a small sigh of relief was probably breathed last week. For, inside, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon had just been told of the UN Security Council’s unanimous decision recommending that he be elected for a second term. Gabon’s UN ambassador Nelson Messone made the announcement to the press after the 15-nation council met behind closed doors. The UN General Assembly will probably vote this week, confirming that Ban will run the organisation until the end of 2016.

Earlier David Cameron had told the press that he was “glad” to support Ban Ki-moon’s candidacy for a second term, noting that the Korean diplomat had “championed and renewed the vital role of United Nations in tackling complex global challenges.” That’s a pretty low form of praise. To say the UN chief should continue in his post because he has “demonstrated a deep commitment to the goals of the United Nations,” is akin to saying that Carlo Ancelotti should have stayed as Chelsea manager because of his deep commitment to the game of football.